saving the world ain't our responsibility no matter what 'our' government says or does. apologies for the way this pasted as i don't know how to remove the spacing the link had created;

The world can be an ugly place. Russia invaded Ukraine. Sudan is consumed by civil war. Haiti is overrun by violent gangs. Conflict has surged in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Somalia is ravaged by violence. Israel is waging war on Palestinians. In Burma the military regime is committing murder and mayhem.

The list goes on: Syria remains divided and at risk after years of conflict. Islamist violence is consuming Nigeria’s Christians and moderate Muslims. China is threatening to forcibly reclaim Taiwan. The Trump administration is killing Yemenis and threatening to bomb Iran. Europeans are pushing America toward a direct military confrontation with Moscow.

These and other conflicts and potential conflicts are terrible. Many people, especially in Washington, look to the U.S. for answers. In their view, if only Uncle Sam is willing to “lead,” the lion will be forced to lie down with the lamb. And all will be well.

Unfortunately, this strategy, as evidenced by the last three decades, has proved to be disastrous. Fixing the world proved to be well beyond Washington’s capability. Equally important, these battles aren’t Americans’ responsibility.

That’s a controversial belief in Washington, where commitment to the U.S. as the crusader state dies hard. Even the Trump administration, staffed with more neocon warriors than MAGA realists, seems determined on war somewhere. Indeed, the conviction that Washington should fix every problem and right every wrong is widely shared. I recently attended a conference on religious persecution around the world, an issue that I have covered for years. I was surprised when a long-time colleague vehemently criticized my long-held opposition to Washington’s continuing military presence in Syria.

Never mind that the American people have never thought of, let alone debated, protecting Syria’s Kurds. Or that the president has not negotiated and the Senate has not ratified a defense treaty. That Syria never has been a significant security interest for America. That Washington did much to harm Syrian civilians by fueling the civil war and applying brutal sanctions. That maintaining a garrison entangles the U.S. in the globe’s most volatile region. That protecting Syrian Kurds requires an ongoing, potentially permanent military presence. That American forces in Syria face multiple challengers, including Russia, Iran, ISIS, unaffiliated Islamist radicals, NATO ally Turkey, and the new Damascus regime, whose leaders once were affiliated with Al Qaeda. Or that such involvement is not in Americans’ interest............more.........